Just in case someone created this poll for research purposes I messed up and selected both do not have the right. I meant to select both do have the right.

My bad please correct in your final numbers

While I do not condone not agree with the topic of this poll personally it is not my right to tell others what to do based off my own personal beliefs. That is why I say they should be allowed to marry

A GOD fearing libertarian can not support gay marriage.A GOD fearing anything can not support gay marriage.or anything else gay for that matter.IT IS AN ABOMINATION.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33328238

The idea of Abrahamic God is diametrically opposite to liberty. Anyone who calls himself a libertarian and supports laws based on the Bible is a hypocrite.

"White privilege" is the liberal religion's version of Original Sin: you are born guilty, and you carry that burden of guilt all your life, and the only way to escape eternal damnation is for white people confess their sin, to bow, kneel and believe the dogma of the Church of Liberalism, genuflect at its altars, honor its saints, fill the collection plate, and never, ever doubt.

I don't care what they do so long as they do it behind closed doors and don't try shoving their "lifestyle" down my or my kids throats.

Quoting: Hawgzilla

I don't care what people do in their bedrooms but when you go out to the street you behave civilly. If your sexual lifestyle includes being a pervert that's your problem, but being a pervert out in public is not acceptable, whether you're hetero or homo (and that goes for the self proclaimed sluts out there too). Now that's libertarianism, do whatever you want as long as it's consensual and it doesn't fuck with anyone else's integrity.

"White privilege" is the liberal religion's version of Original Sin: you are born guilty, and you carry that burden of guilt all your life, and the only way to escape eternal damnation is for white people confess their sin, to bow, kneel and believe the dogma of the Church of Liberalism, genuflect at its altars, honor its saints, fill the collection plate, and never, ever doubt.

The only benefit I see of keeping a marriage between two people is how messy divorce, child custody, alimony, could get if one person could marry many people. And how many spouses would be covered under group insurance?

The whole issue is about money by way of "benefits" and other socially-structured beneficial monetary issues.

Marriages are for the purpose of securing the welfare of children produced by the marriage.

Our society does not need to be funding companionship for comfort, sex or any other purpose. Social funding of companionship is all that gay marriage is about.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33354212

Libertarians don't believe in "benefits" in the first place, if someone wishes to share their assets with whoever they coexist that is their issue and they should have a legal way to do it if they so wish. Anything involving other people's money is out of the question in a libertarian paradigm.

"White privilege" is the liberal religion's version of Original Sin: you are born guilty, and you carry that burden of guilt all your life, and the only way to escape eternal damnation is for white people confess their sin, to bow, kneel and believe the dogma of the Church of Liberalism, genuflect at its altars, honor its saints, fill the collection plate, and never, ever doubt.

The whole issue is about money by way of "benefits" and other socially-structured beneficial monetary issues.

Marriages are for the purpose of securing the welfare of children produced by the marriage.

Our society does not need to be funding companionship for comfort, sex or any other purpose. Social funding of companionship is all that gay marriage is about.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33354212

Libertarians don't believe in "benefits" in the first place, if someone wishes to share their assets with whoever they coexist that is their issue and they should have a legal way to do it if they so wish. Anything involving other people's money is out of the question in a libertarian paradigm.

Quoting: Manu-Koelbren

^^^THIS^^^

Tying legal obligations and benefits to a romantic union is NOT a libertarian concept!

Marriage is a private religious ceremony and institution, therefore the state has no authority to dictate anything to do with marriage, as set forth in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights...

Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot

Ding ding ding.

You are correct sir.

But that means that consenting adults of all kinds have the RIGHT to marry.

This poll implies nothing about legal obligations or benefits.

Quoting: simultaneous_final

What about civil marriage? Marriage is not strictly a religious institution, atheists do marry also.

"White privilege" is the liberal religion's version of Original Sin: you are born guilty, and you carry that burden of guilt all your life, and the only way to escape eternal damnation is for white people confess their sin, to bow, kneel and believe the dogma of the Church of Liberalism, genuflect at its altars, honor its saints, fill the collection plate, and never, ever doubt.

I am personally against the whole gay rights thing because I think it's another NWO sham, but as a libertarian I can't find any logical argument to prohibit gays from having the same inheritance rights as heterosexuals. Most of the arguments against it seem to come from the religious groups and religion is nonsense so it doesn't apply.

"White privilege" is the liberal religion's version of Original Sin: you are born guilty, and you carry that burden of guilt all your life, and the only way to escape eternal damnation is for white people confess their sin, to bow, kneel and believe the dogma of the Church of Liberalism, genuflect at its altars, honor its saints, fill the collection plate, and never, ever doubt.

Marriage is a private religious ceremony and institution, therefore the state has no authority to dictate anything to do with marriage, as set forth in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights...

Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot

Ding ding ding.

You are correct sir.

But that means that consenting adults of all kinds have the RIGHT to marry.

This poll implies nothing about legal obligations or benefits.

Quoting: simultaneous_final

It is God that gives people the right to marriage, not governments. The God of the Bible sets forth marriage as one man and one woman becoming one flesh. The same God condemns homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. When you argue that you have rights granted from God, that necessitates that you play by God's rules in order to obtain those rights.

A marriage between two men, a man and an animal, an adult and a child, etc., are not marriages at all, they are abomination, and are therefore null and void in God's eyes. Actually anything outside of God's law is abomination, and that includes drunkenness, fornication, lust, feminism, etc., which are all legal in our country.

As a free society however, we are bound by the Constitution to allow all men everywhere the freedom to choose their own lifestyles (render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's). Therefore, as we all must give an account for our lives before God, both in this life and at the judgment, it is not within our authority to limit another persons pursuit of happiness, so long as they do not bring harm to ourselves or our families, or infringe upon others' rights.

In this nation we do not live under the Levitical Law, nor would I want to. I know I would not have lived past age 16. With that being said though, there is a moral absolute and it is Thus Saith the LORD. God condemns homosexuality, as does nature, and therefore I am personally and morally opposed to the practice of homosexuality as a whole, not just the marriage part of it. But, just because I or anyone else disagrees with something, doesn't mean it should be made illegal.

The Constitution, which I have sworn before God to uphold, grants all other American citizen the same rights as I have, and therefore I say leave this issue up to the States. The 10th Amendment makes it clear; the federal government has no place in dictating marriage, drug laws, alcohol laws, etc. Abortion is different, I would say, because the first right we all have is the right to LIFE, but that is a completely different topic.

So to answer your question in a long-winded and rambling sort of way, yes everyone should have the right to marriage in this country, because it is a religious institution, not a governmental one. If marriage has been relegated to a state-issue, then let the States vote and decide for themselves, that way if you disagree with the majority of people in your State, you have the ability to move to where your views are the majority.

Marriage is a private religious ceremony and institution, therefore the state has no authority to dictate anything to do with marriage, as set forth in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights...

Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot

Ding ding ding.

You are correct sir.

But that means that consenting adults of all kinds have the RIGHT to marry.

This poll implies nothing about legal obligations or benefits.

Quoting: simultaneous_final

It is God that gives people the right to marriage, not governments. The God of the Bible sets forth marriage as one man and one woman becoming one flesh. The same God condemns homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. When you argue that you have rights granted from God, that necessitates that you play by God's rules in order to obtain those rights.

A marriage between two men, a man and an animal, an adult and a child, etc., are not marriages at all, they are abomination, and are therefore null and void in God's eyes. Actually anything outside of God's law is abomination, and that includes drunkenness, fornication, lust, feminism, etc., which are all legal in our country.

As a free society however, we are bound by the Constitution to allow all men everywhere the freedom to choose their own lifestyles (render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's). Therefore, as we all must give an account for our lives before God, both in this life and at the judgment, it is not within our authority to limit another persons pursuit of happiness, so long as they do not bring harm to ourselves or our families, or infringe upon others' rights.

In this nation we do not live under the Levitical Law, nor would I want to. I know I would not have lived past age 16. With that being said though, there is a moral absolute and it is Thus Saith the LORD. God condemns homosexuality, as does nature, and therefore I am personally and morally opposed to the practice of homosexuality as a whole, not just the marriage part of it. But, just because I or anyone else disagrees with something, doesn't mean it should be made illegal.

The Constitution, which I have sworn before God to uphold, grants all other American citizen the same rights as I have, and therefore I say leave this issue up to the States. The 10th Amendment makes it clear; the federal government has no place in dictating marriage, drug laws, alcohol laws, etc. Abortion is different, I would say, because the first right we all have is the right to LIFE, but that is a completely different topic.

So to answer your question in a long-winded and rambling sort of way, yes everyone should have the right to marriage in this country, because it is a religious institution, not a governmental one. If marriage has been relegated to a state-issue, then let the States vote and decide for themselves, that way if you disagree with the majority of people in your State, you have the ability to move to where your views are the majority.